October 15, 2009 9:20 am

The reviewed goal

In case there is any confusion on what happened last night on the reviewed goal — and I know there was on my end — the ref told the video review judge that he did not signal “no goal” but that he blew the whistle and moved his arms to signify a stoppage. Then, a review clearly showed the puck in the net. The question is, what would have happened if the ref said he DID signal no goal? Could they review the timing of the whistle? That’s still not totally known. Crazy goal…still lots of debate.

Players and coaches are meeting now, after which there is media availability, so stay tuned…

Rules for Blog Commenting
  • No profanity, slurs or other offensive language. Replacing letters with symbols does not turn expletives into non-expletives.
  • Personal attacks against other blog commenters, and/or blatant attempts to antagonize other commenters, are not tolerated. Respectful disagreement is encouraged. Posts that continually express the same singular opinion will be deleted.
  • Comments that incite political, religious or similar debates will be deleted.
  • Please do not discuss, or post links to, websites that illegally stream NHL games.
  • Posting under multiple user names is not allowed. Do not type in all caps. All violations are subject to comment deletion and/or banning of commenters, per the discretion of the blog administrator.